If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Turiaf scored 2 pts.. Did he help us beat Indy???

YES!!! This is all I'm trying to point out to some of you Mike D fans. Players can effect a game other than offensively. Players dont have to score in order to make huge contributions to a win. The game Turiaf had today is proof positive of this.

This is even more of a reason why I wanna see AR and Moz get some burn. Everything doesn't revolve around offense...we have two athletic, young, 7 footers on the bench.....TWO!!!

Some teams in the NBA wish they had one 7 footer as athletic as either Moz or AR. Why are they wasting away on a team that desperately needs some rebounding help? Does that make any sense under any sort of logic? "My team is getting killed on the boards...I have two athletic 7'0'' kids, who will only get better with reps, sitting on the bench...but instead of playing them to grab a ****ing rebound or two...I'm gonna let them ride the pine because I'd rather get Wilson's 10 points in 38 mins as a starter as opposed to 25-30 mins coming off the bench."

Listen, Mike D's teams played defense but the players he had, like STAT, didn't defend their man very well. Also, his teams in Phoenix were always undersized (and now NY). When they are able to run and force teams to play a very fast, scattered type game; they were successful. But when teams forced them into a slow methodical half court game (especially San Antonio) that small sized worked against them. We are seeing affects of that; teams grossly out rebounding us.
That is why I am miffed at everyone here wanting to bring in more players that do not play defense, 1 dimensional selfish scorers. Turiaf and Fields has shown us the benefits and value of a strong minded defensive players on the court.
Also, we are not seeing AR and Moz playing because they are extreme liabilities on the court right now. Moz gets a foul just walking onto the court and AR is out of control when he gets playing time. Mozs inability to adapt to the NBA causes him to disrupt the Knicks game; kills momentum and sends the other team to the foul line. AR is just bouncing off the walls when he gets on the court! I know Mike D concentrates on him in practice but AR is struggling. If the Knicks want to burn this season as well, they could just tlet AR and Moz play and try to see if they can work out their issues on the court.... Do we want that?
A player can have all sorts of talent but if they can not fit into a system or a a city stresses them out.... What good are they to us? They have more trade value than playing value for us... I'm sure Mike D would love a 7 ft player with his athleticism and talent; but if that can't be realized with the Knicks than he needs to be moved.

Listen, Mike D's teams played defense but the players he had, like STAT, didn't defend their man very well. Also, his teams in Phoenix were always undersized (and now NY). When they are able to run and force teams to play a very fast, scattered type game; they were successful. But when teams forced them into a slow methodical half court game (especially San Antonio) that small sized worked against them. We are seeing affects of that; teams grossly out rebounding us.
That is why I am miffed at everyone here wanting to bring in more players that do not play defense, 1 dimensional selfish scorers. Turiaf and Fields has shown us the benefits and value of a strong minded defensive players on the court.
Also, we are not seeing AR and Moz playing because they are extreme liabilities on the court right now. Moz gets a foul just walking onto the court and AR is out of control when he gets playing time. Mozs inability to adapt to the NBA causes him to disrupt the Knicks game; kills momentum and sends the other team to the foul line. AR is just bouncing off the walls when he gets on the court! I know Mike D concentrates on him in practice but AR is struggling. If the Knicks want to burn this season as well, they could just tlet AR and Moz play and try to see if they can work out their issues on the court.... Do we want that?
A player can have all sorts of talent but if they can not fit into a system or a a city stresses them out.... What good are they to us? They have more trade value than playing value for us... I'm sure Mike D would love a 7 ft player with his athleticism and talent; but if that can't be realized with the Knicks than he needs to be moved.

Extreme liabilities? Or extreme offensive liabilities? Look no one is saying Moz is the next Ewing or that AR is the next Oakley, but I'm sure they can offer this team something to help them win. But, I'm sure you Mike D fans cant/wont see this because Mike D cant see it himself.

When I look at what Jordan Hill and Milliecec (sp) are doing now compared to what they did under Mike D it's ludicrious. Again, neither is an allstar, but they are making contributions. I dont think AR and Moz upset the overall game plan. Just the offensive game plan. Wouldnt you agree?

Would you say that Turiaf also disrupts the Knicks OFFENSIVE game plan? Yet looking at yesterdays game we wouldnt have won without him. Why not utililze a players strengths instead of admonishing him for his weaknesses? Hill and Darko are getting better every game they play. I'm sure giving AR and Moz playing time would have the same affect.

I think you want to tie this playing time into Knick wins. Which I think is incorrect. The Knicks right now are beating the teams they should, but losing to the so called elite teams. These losses are basically because of defense and rebounding. Why not utilize these 7 footers to see if they can make up the difference, or at least decrease the difference? Seems logical to me.

If Mozgov is getting 2-3 fouls almost immediately that's a defensive liability too because we're in the penalty way too early in the quarter. That being said we get torn up by the other teams big men almost every game so I'd like to see Dantoni play those guys a few minutes a game to see if they can do anything. I felt Darko and Hill deserved more minutes last season and their play this season shows they could have contributed.

Extreme liabilities? Or extreme offensive liabilities? Look no one is saying Moz is the next Ewing or that AR is the next Oakley, but I'm sure they can offer this team something to help them win. But, I'm sure you Mike D fans cant/wont see this because Mike D cant see it himself.

When I look at what Jordan Hill and Milliecec (sp) are doing now compared to what they did under Mike D it's ludicrious. Again, neither is an allstar, but they are making contributions. I dont think AR and Moz upset the overall game plan. Just the offensive game plan. Wouldnt you agree?

Would you say that Turiaf also disrupts the Knicks OFFENSIVE game plan? Yet looking at yesterdays game we wouldnt have won without him. Why not utililze a players strengths instead of admonishing him for his weaknesses? Hill and Darko are getting better every game they play. I'm sure giving AR and Moz playing time would have the same affect.

I think you want to tie this playing time into Knick wins. Which I think is incorrect. The Knicks right now are beating the teams they should, but losing to the so called elite teams. These losses are basically because of defense and rebounding. Why not utilize these 7 footers to see if they can make up the difference, or at least decrease the difference? Seems logical to me.

YES!!! This is all I'm trying to point out to some of you Mike D fans. Players can effect a game other than offensively. Players dont have to score in order to make huge contributions to a win. The game Turiaf had today is proof positive of this.

Your argument is flawed.

The difference between Turiaf and AR/Moz is turnovers and fouls. Period.

Nothing gets you glued to the bench faster than inane turnovers and unnecessary fouls. Learn the game Clydeandthepearl.. Your off to bad start on the forum.

The difference between Turiaf and AR/Moz is turnovers and fouls. Period.

Nothing gets you glued to the bench faster than inane turnovers and unnecessary fouls. Learn the game Clydeandthepearl.. Your off to bad start on the forum.

Not trying to get into a dick swinging contest with you ronoranina, but I've forgotten more about BBall than you'll ever know.

Based on your philosphy when STAT was averaging 7 T O's a game (he's still over 4) he should have been benched. Nah I dont think so. Does Moz get into foul trouble a bit too much? Possibly? But. IMHO he's being targeted by the refs. Many of his foull calls are of the ticky tack variety. I've seen this kid develop. In preseason he had a problem with moving screens. Got coached up now you rarely see that called on him (when he actually plays). The only solution for this is to let him play and let the refs see he's game more, and coach him up.

As far as AR I thought it was shot selection? Funny that a coach that wants shots to go up in 7 secs or less has a problem with a players shot selection. The problem is AR doesnt have a midrange jumper of note. If he did he'd be playing. It doesnt matter that defensively he could lock down a bunch of small forwards in this league. It doesnt matter that if you get him closer to the rim his shooting % goes up DRASTICALLY. If he cant run the offense to COACHES liking he's benched.

Whats funny Gallo (although I admit he's improving) couldnt defend my 12 year old neice. But because he's the BEST SHOOTER our coach has ever seen he gets 35 mins a night. You wanna look at flaws? Lets look at Gallos. He's weak. Cant take it to the rim consistently. No handle. Cant defend. Cant shoot off the dribble. Has no left hand. Inside game is NON-EXISTENT. Yet coach extols his limited game. But offensively he fits what Mike D wants to do. Like I said in another post defense is 50% of basketball.

In the future when you come at me make sure its real. Nitpicking at a players flaws doesnt make that player totally useless to that team.

Not trying to get into a dick swinging contest with you ronoranina, but I've forgotten more about BBall than you'll ever know.

Based on your philosphy when STAT was averaging 7 T O's a game (he's still over 4) he should have been benched. Nah I dont think so. Does Moz get into foul trouble a bit too much? Possibly? But. IMHO he's being targeted by the refs. Many of his foull calls are of the ticky tack variety. I've seen this kid develop. In preseason he had a problem with moving screens. Got coached up now you rarely see that called on him (when he actually plays). The only solution for this is to let him play and let the refs see he's game more, and coach him up.

As far as AR I thought it was shot selection? Funny that a coach that wants shots to go up in 7 secs or less has a problem with a players shot selection. The problem is AR doesnt have a midrange jumper of note. If he did he'd be playing. It doesnt matter that defensively he could lock down a bunch of small forwards in this league. It doesnt matter that if you get him closer to the rim his shooting % goes up DRASTICALLY. If he cant run the offense to COACHES liking he's benched.

Whats funny Gallo (although I admit he's improving) couldnt defend my 12 year old neice. But because he's the BEST SHOOTER our coach has ever seen he gets 35 mins a night. You wanna look at flaws? Lets look at Gallos. He's weak. Cant take it to the rim consistently. No handle. Cant defend. Cant shoot off the dribble. Has no left hand. Inside game is NON-EXISTENT. Yet coach extols his limited game. But offensively he fits what Mike D wants to do. Like I said in another post defense is 50% of basketball.

In the future when you come at me make sure its real. Nitpicking at a players flaws doesnt make that player totally useless to that team.